RWBY vol 8 discussion thread

[Spinoirr]

This is for this new form

 

[ShadowWhoWalks]

So anyone has a feat/calc list for Volume 7? We should do this before making a scaling chain.
Also, the Light and Dark Brothers were one universal beings split into equal halfs. So their tier is At least 3-B?

There are statements that the RWBY manga is a lower level of canon (canon until it is not; until it contradicts the show or other materials); does it have good feats, and should the manga have its own profiles.

 

[Spinoirr]

The manga should have its own profiles as they are MCB level (I'm talking the the "RWBY official manga" and not the anthologys that are cannon)

 

[ShadowWhoWalks]

I skimmed through the manga, but I am not sure making profiles for the manga is worth it. The feats I found are:

They encounter extra-large versions of species of Grimm compared to the ones in Volume 1 & 2:

The dust vial Roman threw in the first episode did a larger explosion:

Yang can do this with the ground:

Rwby can slice a large chunk off a cliff (not sure if it is the same cliff in both instances):

The train explosion and its crater are decently large (The fireball is not depicted in the show and the crater is not clearly shown, but Weiss created an ice shield around her team for protection, and the manga only states that the team weakened the explosion by separating train carts):

A horde of Grimm did this to a section of Mountain Glenn:

Oobleck can one-shot Atlasian Paladins (though it is compatible with what we've seen him do in the show, and it is stated that he can solo multiple of them):

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

Also, the Light and Dark Brothers were one universal beings split into equal halfs. So their tier is At least 3-B?

Yeah, no. I own the book, went over that claim point by point, and explained how this literally isn't represented in Fairy Tales of RWBY outside of Ozpin's talking about a narrative trend that either doesn't exist (there's zero mention of the Gods creating an entire, as we define it, universe in any of the fairy tales we know of), or he defines Universe as the world of Remnant. Either we assume Ozpin was talking about Remnant or that he was talking out of his ass, basically.

This entire upgrade is based on misinterpretation of a cliffnotes-esque summary of an in-verse fairy tale that outright contradicts known canon. I strongly advise that our users read the source material of claims before they propose such massive revisions based on them.

I'll just repost what I said on that thread, too.

Just got the book, by the way.

• "The Two Brothers" fable makes zero mention of the merged gods creating the universe. It starts off with them travelling an already-existing universe.
• There's zero mention of Salem, Ozpin, the or the lifewipe the God of Darkness does.
• The dragons (the Gods) transform into continents on Remnant and stay on there.
• Ozpin's notes says that a common trend in the Two Gods fables is that they created the universe together. However, there's issues with this.
  • Of all the fables we hear involving the two Gods, none mention them creating the universe. It's only mentioned that they created Remnant. And Ozpin says "they together" created it, when the only thing the gods created "together" was Remnant, in both fairy tales. "Universe" is likely, then, being used as a moniker for "Remnant", if Ozpin is to be trusted as a scholar.
  • Ozpin has zero grounds to say whether or not the Gods created the Universe as a statement to begin with, putting aside these being his notes on fairy tales and assuming he's literally telling the audience they created the greater universe and not simply remnant.
  • Literally nothing here says the merged Gods created the universe. Ozpin actually states that they "created the universe" after they split with how he phrases it. This makes me think even more that he's reffering to Remnant.

tl;dr the Gods aren't actually 3-A. Good book, though.

There is no part about them creating the universe in the fairy tale. This is something Ozpin says that isn't associated with any Fable about the Gods shown thusfar, but he's phrasing it like it's a trend in every fable. This basically leaves us with three options:
* Ozpin doesn't know what he's talking about. (This is kind of dumb)
* The writers flubbed up and didn't match Ozpin's theory to the actual tales they wrote. (Less dumb but plausible).
* "Universe" refers to Remnant. Everything about the way he phrased his analysis and the actual fables he analyzed himself makes that extremely likely. Ozpin stays credible and the writers are maybe just a little liable.
Additionally, if large parts of the fable are proven to be false, why would we assume on good faith that the parts we can't confirm as false are true? Wouldn't that mean that there's a large question mark on anything we take from it, since they could easily be a contruct of the fable-writer and not history itself?

When we have not seen the upper limits of a character, that does not mean we readily accept any statements about them. I'd recommend reading our page on [[Statements]] - we expect that the person giving the statement has grounds to actually make the statement to begin with. Even if Ozpin said "The Two Gods created the Universe, this is fact" he doesn't have any ground to say how the universe was created (without maybe Jinn, although that makes a huge assumption since the show makes a big deal out of the questions he asked and this never comes up)

What he does isn't even that though - he's literally just pointing out a trend in mythology. Stuff created by Remnant inhabitants, not people with access to Relics. And he's pointing out a trend that, if we use our traditional definition of universe, doesn't even add up with the myth's he's discussing.

 

[ShadowWhoWalks]

this literally isn't represented in Fairy Tales of RWBY outside of Ozpin's talking about a narrative trend that either doesn't exist (there's zero mention of the Gods creating an entire, as we define it, universe in any of the fairy tales we know of), or he defines Universe as the world of Remnant. Either we assume Ozpin was talking about Remnant or that he was talking out of his ass, basically.

That is incorrect though: The fairy tale states:

In the beginning of time, a lone dragon traveled the universe in search of other beings like himself.

Which is an implication that the dragon created the universe; this is the apparent meaning. A less intuitive alternative is that the dragon was created with the universe or that the dragon was teleported into the universe at the moment of its creation.

The dragon travelled the universe before the creation of the planet. Speculating that the people of Remnant who tried to have a space program commonly understand 'universe' as 'planet Remnant' is quite ridiculous; they are not living in a cave.

Ozpin states that they created the universe in almost every creation story... So why are you saying that creation stories don't mention that they created the universe? Maybe less poetic versions are more explicit about it.

Ozpin has zero grounds to say whether or not the Gods created the Universe as a statement to begin with, putting aside these being his notes on fairy tales and assuming he's literally telling the audience they created the greater universe and not simply remnant.
...
When we have not seen the upper limits of a character, that does not mean we readily accept any statements about them. I'd recommend reading our page on [[Statements]] - we expect that the person giving the statement has grounds to actually make the statement to begin with. Even if Ozpin said "The Two Gods created the Universe, this is fact" he doesn't have any ground to say how the universe was created (without maybe Jinn, although that makes a huge assumption since the show makes a big deal out of the questions he asked and this never comes up)

What he does isn't even that though - he's literally just pointing out a trend in mythology. Stuff created by Remnant inhabitants, not people with access to Relics. And he's pointing out a trend that, if we use our traditional definition of universe, doesn't even add up with the myth's he's discussing.

Yes he does. He lived in a period where the God of Light was openly worshipped and conversed with. Any commonly-known lore about what happened before the creation of the planet likely comes from him.

Also, note that humans (except Salem, if she counts as one) were wiped out. They later returned through unknown means. However, most creation stories from Remnant's humanity are still based on the Two Brothers, which means that humanity re-learned about the Two Brothers from a reliable source. They did not make things up and a bunch of mythological trends coalesced into a brother of light & darkness through pure coincidence.

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

Which is an implication that the dragon created the universe; this is the apparent meaning. A less intuitive alternative is that the dragon was created with the universe or that the dragon was teleported into the universe at the moment of its creation.

If traveling and existing in a universe implies the entity in question created the universe, basically every RWBY character is 3-A.

That's not an implication, that's just poor logic.

Ozpin states that they created the universe in almost every creation story... So why are you saying that creation stories don't mention that they created the universe? Maybe less poetic versions are more explicit about it.

I'm saying the creation stories don't mention it because they, well, don't mention it. Give me a citation on any fable in RWBY mentioned thusfar containing references to the Gods creating the Universe if you're so keen on claiming they have it, instead of asking me to disprove an argument you haven't even made properly yet.

And please, there's poetic language and there's just the utter absence of something. There's zero implication that the lone god created the universe in that story, and the only other Twin Gods creation story we're given only mentions them creating Remnant.

Speculating that the people of Remnant who tried to have a space program commonly understand 'universe' as 'planet Remnant' is quite ridiculous; they are not living in a cave.

I'm not questioning the competency of the scientists in RWBY, I'm questioning the word choice of a single scholar, which can only really be interpreted to to either say Ozpin doesn't actually read/understand the fables he analyzes, or just chooses to call Remnant a different word. Or if we want to be meta about this, the writers for the book weren't consistent with themselves because this is an anthology written by multiple authors.

Yes he does. He lived in a period where the God of Light was openly worshipped and conversed with. Any commonly-known lore about what happened before the creation of the planet likely comes from him.

It doesn't give him an innate understanding of the history of the Universe, nor do we know how extensively the Gods dispersed information to the masses during their reign. Obviously not too well, since the major kingdoms at the time actually thought they had some kind of chance against them in combat.

The Gods talked to humans =/= humans know literally everything about the Gods.

Which doesn't matter anyways since that point was just a steelman argument that assumed Ozpin did and said things he didn't in the book, and stripped all context away from this being a collection of myths and legends that outright contradict known canon.

They did not make things up and a bunch of mythological trends coalesced into a brother of light & darkness through pure coincidence.

The Fairy Tales of RWBY book demonstrably proves you wrong, as the Twin Gods didn't stay on Remnant and turn into its continents.

Ozpin literally tells this to you. There's an element of truth in the fairy tales and legends of Remnant, however this idea that they're objective fact and couldn't possibly be altered or changed significantly by the people who relayed them over centuries and millennia makes zero sense for anyone familiar with how legends and myths actually spread, or anyone familiar with the game of telephone.

The fact this argument is still being pushed even after we have strict examples of these fairy tales contradicting the events we see Jinn show us just baffles me.

 

[Spinoirr]

At most you can say the gods are likely star level thanks to makeing the sun

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

At most you can say the gods are likely star level thanks to makeing the sun

Which is questionable as well.

The fairy tale that says the God of Light created the Sun also said that the God of Light and Darkness stayed on remnant and became its continents, and basically left out 90% of the context behind the Gods leaving and why they did it.

So basically everything in it that isn't part of what we already know is suspect. I'd wait for information like that to be confirmed directly in the show, since the stories in the book are at the very least not shown to follow what we know from Jinn.

 

[ShadowWhoWalks]

If traveling and existing in a universe implies the entity in question created the universe, basically every RWBY character is 3-A.

That's not an implication, that's just poor logic.

Strawman. Other characters were not travelling since the beginning of time, and if they did then yes such characters might be 3-A.

I'm saying the creation stories don't mention it because they, well, don't mention it. Give me a citation on any fable in RWBY mentioned thusfar containing references to the Gods creating the Universe if you're so keen on claiming they have it, instead of asking me to disprove an argument you haven't even made properly yet.

And please, there's poetic language and there's just the utter absence of something. There's zero implication that the lone god created the universe in that story, and the only other Twin Gods creation story we're given only mentions them creating Remnant.

You realize that the book has a sample of creation stories and fairy tails, and don't encompass all of them, correct? And there are bound to be various versions of the ones that are mentioned.

And as stated, creation of the universe is already implied by the fairy tail narrated by Qrow:

In the beginning of time, a lone dragon traveled the universe in search of other beings like himself.

I'm not questioning the competency of the scientists in RWBY, I'm questioning the word choice of a single scholar, which can only really be interpreted to to either say Ozpin doesn't actually read/understand the fables he analyzes, or just chooses to call Remnant a different word. Or if we want to be meta about this, the writers for the book weren't consistent with themselves because this is an anthology written by multiple authors.

You provided speculation that the people of Remnant have a non-traditional definition of universe, or that Ozpin colloquially names the planet "the universe". This is absurd. Anyone who looks at the sky (laymen not even scientists) can see celestial objects; there is no cause for Remnant's population to have some radically different definition for 'universe', nor is there any evidence for a planet being referred to as 'universe' in RWBY's world.

So according to you, did the dragon create the planet before the dragon travelled the universe or after he started travelling the universe?

It doesn't give him an innate understanding of the history of the Universe, nor do we know how extensively the Gods dispersed information to the masses during their reign. Obviously not too well, since the major kingdoms at the time actually thought they had some kind of chance against them in combat.

The Gods talked to humans =/= humans know literally everything about the Gods.

Which doesn't matter anyways since that point was just a steelman argument that assumed Ozpin did and said things he didn't in the book, and stripped all context away from this being a collection of myths and legends that outright contradict known canon.

Good thing I made no such argument, that Ozpin gained an innate understanding of the history of the universe, or that he literally knows everything about the gods.

Only that the commonly-known lore at Ozma's time about what happened before the planet was likely gained from the God of Light.
Greedy monarchs were tempted by stealing immortality for themselves; lacking scale in such circumstances happens.

Nonetheless, your steelman's argument doesn't give Ozpin his due credit as a reliable source if he made such statement.

The Fairy Tales of RWBY book demonstrably proves you wrong, as the Twin Gods didn't stay on Remnant and turn into its continents.

Ozpin literally tells this to you. There's an element of truth in the fairy tales and legends of Remnant, however this idea that they're objective fact and couldn't possibly be altered or changed significantly by the people who relayed them over centuries and millennia makes zero sense for anyone familiar with how legends and myths actually spread, or anyone familiar with the game of telephone.

The fact this argument is still being pushed even after we have strict examples of these fairy tales contradicting the events we see Jinn show us just baffles me.

Are you saying that the new humans who appeared in Remnant accidently and through pure chance made up the Twin Gods without anyone originally telling them about it?
If not, then you are not addressing my point.
I would be proven wrong if I made the claim that various versions of fairy tales do not contain inaccuracies.

Four things are consistent in almost all creation stories:

1. The Twin Gods existed
2. The Twin Gods arrived from a realm outside mankind’s
3. The Twin Gods created the universe together out of nothing
4. The Twin Gods left mankind on its own

Based on these four elements, we can easily make a version of the story that does not contradict canon, and since there are various versions of the story in-universe there are likely in-universe versions that does not contradict canon.

At most you can say the gods are likely star level thanks to makeing the sun

No, at minimum we can say that they are Likely or Possibly 3-B.

 

[Ovrhide]

No, there won’t be any 3-B gods, and it was already explained why.

 

[ShadowWhoWalks]

The reasoning was flawed, and it was already explained why.
The counter-response heavily included strawmen.

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

Strawman. Other characters were not travelling since the beginning of time, and if they did then yes such characters might be 3-A.

I mean, it's not really a stawman, because "travelling since the beginning of time" has absolutely nothing to do with having an explicit or implied 3-A rating, and thus adds nothing of substance to the argument being made here.

There's plenty of characters who are as old as the universes they hail from but aren't responsible for creating it.

And as stated, creation of the universe is already implied by the fairy tail narrated by Qrow:

If by implied you mean you specifically inserting information/context into a passage that lacks it, sure. There's, again, nothing in there that implies the lone dragon created the universe beyond what you've injected into it yourself.

Noticeably, like I expected, a citation on the gods directly creating the universe in any known fairy tale is absent.

You realize that the book has a sample of creation stories and fairy tails, and don't encompass all of them, correct? And there are bound to be various versions of the ones that are mentioned.

The one we read is the one Ozpin is specifically commenting on. You'd imagine that if he was making some kind of observation of a far-spanning trend his observation would be present in that, but it isn't.

And the only other versions we see also happen to lack it.

Good thing I made no such argument, that Ozpin gained an innate understanding of the history of the universe, or that he literally knows everything about the gods.

Cool, which is what he'd need to have grounds to claim the Gods created the Universe directly.

And he isn't doing that, so the argument being made here is kind of looking worse by the second.

Are you saying that the new humans who appeared in Remnant accidently and through pure chance made up the Twin Gods without anyone originally telling them about it?

No. Let me explain.

A tale or legend isn't randomly thought up of or made by chance. There's always some elements of truth, such as the Gods existing, them abandoning humanity, et cetera. However, as those tales or legends are told over time, new elements can be introduced by the people relaying them over and over again, changing the tale and warping it. The end product has elements of truth and fiction just like Ozpin explains.

We can clearly see that, with this novel, the legends contained in it have elements that are fictitious. The Gods do not turn themselves into the continents of Remnant. Other elements, such as the God of Light creating the Sun are thus thrown into doubt because we don't have confirmation on that through Jinn and they could very well be stuff the denizens of Remnant tacked onto the fables.

Four things are consistent in almost all creation stories:

One of these is not like the others:

1. The Twin Gods created the universe together out of nothing

Considering you failed to provide a single citation of a single fable/fairy tale containing this, and we know through actually reading the relevant fables that this doesn't happen (they create Remnant, not the entire universe), this trend that you're speaking of doesn't exist.

Based on these four elements, we can easily make a version of the story that does not contradict canon, and since there are various versions of the story in-universe there are likely in-universe versions that does not contradict canon.

Instead of constructing a fan-made story that's liable to a large amount of error, we can instead, get this, use the version that we actually see happen through Jinn. What you're talking about is drawing elements from stories that don't explicitly contradict canon even when other parts of those same stories do, which is ridiculous, since there's just as much of a chance that the elements that we can't confirm are true/false are false as they are true.

The reasoning was flawed, and it was already explained why.
The counter-response heavily included strawmen.

I'm pretty sure it's clear at this point that 3-B/3-A is highly speculatory, is based on Ozpin's offhanded comments on stories that contradict known canon, with said stories not even reflecting his own comments.

Your entire argument is based on a premise that existing since the dawn of the universe = implicit creation of the universe. Considering that there's no correlation between these two, and there's dozens upon dozens of examples of characters on the wiki who are that old but haven't created universes, it's fair to say that the rating being proposed has a flimsy justification and should just be dropped.

Instead of trying to construct ratings from what are essentially fan theories, let's wait until we have more direct exposition on the Gods from Jinn or through a flashback on the main show. If the authors behind RWBY actually want to go with the Gods creating the entire universe I'm sure it'll be something that come up near the end of the series.

 

[Wrath_Of_Itachi]

There is also an issue with their current 5-A feat.

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

There is also an issue with their current 5-A feat.

Oh? What's up with that?

 

[Wrath_Of_Itachi]

For one, the feat is only on NF with no evaluations from the calc members on this site. There is also no px scaling images that I could find, and another has one of the rocks from the moon being bigger than the actual moon.

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

For one, the feat is only on NF with no evaluations from the calc members on this site. There is also no px scaling images that I could find, and another has one of the rocks from the moon being bigger than the actual moon.

I've actually done a calc on that feat myself which was only slightly below the one linked on profiles.

If that can be evaluated I think that'd solve our dilemma here.

 

[Wrath_Of_Itachi]

It would solve the problem I have, if the calc you did is correct.

 

[Sir_Ovens]

Dargoo's argument is solid so far. If we can get scans of direct statements saying that the God Brothers directly created the universe, maybe I'd be more inclined to side against. But for now, I'm siding with Dargoo.

Plus, this situation sounds like the whole Diary of a Whimpy Kid scenario. Stories told within fiction need an extra layer of context since the narrative isn't WoG anymore.

 

[ShadowWhoWalks]

I mean, it's not really a stawman, because "travelling since the beginning of time" has absolutely nothing to do with having an explicit or implied 3-A rating, and thus adds nothing of substance to the argument being made here.

There's plenty of characters who are as old as the universes they hail from but aren't responsible for creating it.

You made it as if I said "He travelled and existed in the universe, therefore he is 3-B", and then started talking about how such an argument is logically flawed. Sounds like a straight-forward strawman.

I said that with the statement: 'a god existed in the universe during its inception', the apparent meaning is that this god created the universe. I also acknowledged that this is not conclusive since more convoluted interpretations are possible (the god was created with the universe, or the god was teleported into the universe at the moment of its creation).

This means that there is no ground to claim that the story narrated by Qrow absolutely and irrevocably contradicts Ozpin's statements, which is that almost all creation stories have the Two Brothers create the universe; at most you can say that the story can be interpreted in a way that contradicts the general rule established by Ozpin.

Before we start declaring that a statement is completely and irreconcilably inconsistent, we should make good effort to reconcile it; and in this case it is quite simple: The straight-forward interpretation, that the dragon created the universe, is conveyed in a poetic way (In the beginning of time, a lone dragon traveled the universe), thus it can fit-in with the general rule Ozpin established.

If by implied you mean you specifically inserting information/context into a passage that lacks it, sure. There's, again, nothing in there that implies the lone dragon created the universe beyond what you've injected into it yourself.

Noticeably, like I expected, a citation on the gods directly creating the universe in any known fairy tale is absent.

Nope, by implied I mean suggested but not directly expressed.

Later on it is directly expressed:

The Two Brothers appear in almost every creation story in various forms, but one thing is consistent: they arrived from a realm outside mankind’s, and created the universe together out of nothing, leaving mankind on its own. Whether you believe in them or not, the underlying message that we are burdened with responsibility for our own world is true, and mankind shares a common destiny. -Ozpin

Therefore, there are many known fairy tales, expressed in various forms, where it is stated that the Two Brothers created the universe out of nothing; regardless if such fairy tales are shown or not. And per the trend that exists in almost every creation story, the one shown was likely understood as the dragon creating the universe before traveling in it.

The one we read is the one Ozpin is specifically commenting on. You'd imagine that if he was making some kind of observation of a far-spanning trend his observation would be present in that, but it isn't.

And the only other versions we see also happen to lack it.

First of all, whether the far-spanning trend exists in the story or not is irrelevant to the far-spanning trend being true or not. Secondly, as I explained the story can be understood as such hence Ozpin would be adding context to how the story is commonly understood.

I am confused. I am aware that there are narrated fairy tales about the creation of Faunus, but are you saying that you found other fairy tales specifically talking about the beginning of time for the universe?

Cool, which is what he'd need to have grounds to claim the Gods created the Universe directly.

And he isn't doing that, so the argument being made here is kind of looking worse by the second.

So in order for people to learn a piece of lore about the God Brothers while conversing with them (that they created the universe), they need to learn literally everything about the Gods?

Wow. Do I really need to explain why this is incoherent and a terrible argument?

No. Let me explain.

A tale or legend isn't randomly thought up of or made by chance. There's always some elements of truth, such as the Gods existing, them abandoning humanity, et cetera. However, as those tales or legends are told over time, new elements can be introduced by the people relaying them over and over again, changing the tale and warping it. The end product has elements of truth and fiction just like Ozpin explains.

We can clearly see that, with this novel, the legends contained in it have elements that are fictitious. The Gods do not turn themselves into the continents of Remnant. Other elements, such as the God of Light creating the Sun are thus thrown into doubt because we don't have confirmation on that through Jinn and they could very well be stuff the denizens of Remnant tacked onto the fables.

Remember what Ozpin said; almost everything in the story has variations, but one of the few consistent elements is that the God Brothers existed, and that they created the universe out of nothing. Do you believe that the existence of a consistent claim in many historical narrations from various sources, and a lack of variance in the claim, gives the claim good credibility?
Is it more likely that the very few consistent elements were randomly thought up and made by chance, or that they reported by a reliable source?

If you find one of the few consistent elements in narrations to be unreliable, yet acknowledge that you can't claim that they are false, then are you open to a:
Possibly 3-B (Believed to have created the universe out of nothing with his Brother in almost all creation stories)
rating?

Considering you failed to provide a single citation of a single fable/fairy tale containing this, and we know through actually reading the relevant fables that this doesn't happen (they create Remnant, not the entire universe), this trend that you're speaking of doesn't exist.
...
Instead of constructing a fan-made story that's liable to a large amount of error, we can instead, get this, use the version that we actually see happen through Jinn. What you're talking about is drawing elements from stories that don't explicitly contradict canon even when other parts of those same stories do, which is ridiculous, since there's just as much of a chance that the elements that we can't confirm are true/false are false as they are true.

You failing to address Ozpin's statement is from you.

The Two Brothers appear in almost every creation story in various forms, but one thing is consistent: they arrived from a realm outside mankind’s, and created the universe together out of nothing, leaving mankind on its own. Whether you believe in them or not, the underlying message that we are burdened with responsibility for our own world is true, and mankind shares a common destiny.

Ozpin: There is a trend that...
You: There is no such trend.

Does Jinn's vision talk about what happened before the planet was created, or what happened at the beginning of time? If not, then how is it relevant.

• Almost everything in the story involves variations that contradict canon.
• The Few consistent elements in the story (The God Brothers existed, they arrived from a realm outside mankind’s, they created the universe together out of nothing, they left mankind on its own) does not contradict canon.

Is this difficult to understand? I agree that the elements that have variations have no reliability.

 

[Sir_Ovens]

It's not about contradicting canon though. It's about how it's a story within a story. We have no way to validate what's being said is WoG because it's just a story told by fictional characters within a fictional verse.

 

[ShadowWhoWalks]

And I am fine with a Possibly tier, but what is suggested is dismissal of the statement that almost all versions of the story consistently have the God Brothers creating the universe out of nothing (and as I explained, even the version narrated in the book can be plausibly understood this way since it starts with the beginning of time for the universe), or a call to reinterpret the word 'universe' to mean the planet Remnant.

----

Spoiler: A Roosterteeth 3D artists posted then deleted the new model for Ironwood's arm

Iron Daddy adding more metal to his body

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

Before we start declaring that a statement is completely and irreconcilably inconsistent, we should make good effort to reconcile it; and in this case it is quite simple: The straight-forward interpretation, that the dragon created the universe, is conveyed in a poetic way

I'll just discontinue on the back-and-forth on stawmanning since that's likely going to go nowhere at this point. The bottom line is that, for your point to work, we need to insert information into the fairy tale that doesn't exist in there.

It's not "conveyed in a poetic way", it isn't conveyed at all and you're inserting it in there.

Nope, by implied I mean suggested but not directly expressed.

And there isn't anything suggested in that passage beyond the Gods existing during the inception of the universe, so it isn't implicit either. It should be fairly obvious from my argument that I'm saying your evidence lacks both implicit and explicit examples.

Therefore, there are many known fairy tales, expressed in various forms, where it is stated that the Two Brothers created the universe out of nothing; regardless if such fairy tales are shown or not. And per the trend that exists in almost every creation story, the one shown was likely understood as the dragon creating the universe before traveling in it.

That's us inserting something that doesn't happen inside of the fairy tales to fit a faulty statement Ozpin makes, not us understanding something implicit in the fairy tales we know of.

It'd be like Ozpin saying the God of Light spawned an infinite multiverse in every fairy tale, the fairy tales themselves not mentioning or implying this, and instead of us deducing his stated trend to be inconsistent we go "well, the fairy tales didn't state that the God of Light didn't create a multiverse", which is just silly.

Heck, when we see Qrow narrate the same story to RNJR there's zero mention of the greater universe to begin with. If them "creating the universe" was this large consistent trend you'd imagine we'd see it at least once in the same tale Ozpin's commenting on.

So in order for people to learn a piece of lore about the God Brothers while conversing with them (that they created the universe), they need to learn literally everything about the Gods?

Once again the point goes flying over your head.

For us to assume that every statement from the people on the Gods is true, that needs to be true. There's a massive layer of doubt over whether or not the Gods would disclose such important information about their history, especially since we know the people at the time didn't have a complete or even mostly complete grasp on the nature of the Gods and their power.

We're assuming with this argument that Ozpin/Age of Gods humans know the complete backstory of the Gods when they don't know such basic details as to the scope and power of either of them. It's a faulty assumption.

Do you believe that the existence of a consistent claim in many historical narrations from various sources, and a lack of variance in the claim, gives the claim good credibility?

I believe that claim is bullshit when it isn't represented in any historical narrations (Jinn, Qrow) that we know of, including the specific narration that statement is being made off of.

Ozpin: There is a trend that...
You: There is no such trend.

Because we can observe that this trend doesn't exist in the very tale Ozpin comments on. That isn't that difficult to understand.

There isn't a trend we observe, there's a trend that Ozpin observes that isn't reflected in any known examples to us.

To add on to this, you're claiming that the lone dragon created the universe in that fairy tale and this being a consistent trend, despite Ozpin saying that the plural gods created it despite the universe already existing prior to their split in the fairy tale we're told. If you want a more direct example of Ozpin's claim being inconsistent.

Is this difficult to understand? I agree that the elements that have variations have no reliability.

I think that elements from fairy tales and legends in a verse shouldn't be taken literally until we see them confirmed directly. I get you're pushing for a possibly rating, but this reaches far too out there to get even that.

and as I explained, even the version narrated in the book can be plausibly understood this way since it starts with the beginning of time for the universe

What you explained was inserting information not present in the fairy tale to make it line up with Ozpin's statement, not interpreting it differently.

 

[XSOULOFCINDERX]

I agree with Dargoo. Plus, how the **** would any of these people know what the universe is like if they can't even leave the atmosphere because dust can't work in space?

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

Plus, how the **** would any of these people know what the universe is like if they can't even leave the atmosphere because dust can't work in space?

Well, we can make a lot of observations on the universe just from what we can see on Earth. Not saying that the people of Remnant can't have a grasp of the scope of the universe they're in without leaving remnant.

It's more with how the people who are supposedly knowledgeable enough on the Gods for it to be common knowledge that they created the entire universe not having a grasp on how much power and dominion either God held. They seriously thought attacking them with an army of human magic-users was a good idea.

And also the pre-modern civilizations having a grasp of the universe's size is iffy, since they were the ones writing the fairy tales, not modern Remnant scientists. Which is another point against the argument being made here, I guess.

Meanwhile stuff like them shattering the moon, creating/being able to destroy the planet, etc. are all stuff we can confirm with narration and flashbacks shown by Jinn. Again before any rating is applied I'd like for us to have direct confirmation. 3-B/3-A is so ridiculously outside of the scope of what feats we see them perform directly that it'd be weird to assume for ourselves that they're at that level based on in-verse mythology.

 

[Spinoirr]

They are most likely star level as how the hell did that sun get there if they made the planet and moon and it Does mention they made the sun in the book

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

They are most likely star level as how the hell did that sun get there if they made the planet and moon and it Does mention they made the sun in the book

Qrow's version of the story includes that for sure, yeah.

I'd be iffy on that though. The same exact rendition of the story contradicts known canon in a variety of ways - so there's nothing to say that the creation of the Sun isn't as much of a fabrication as the Gods staying on Remnant as the continents.

As for how the Sun could have got there otherwise, it could have just formed naturally like any other star.

 

[Spinoirr]

I would assume we wouldn't know unless someone asks

 

[WeeklyBattles]

Well shit

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

bruh

 

[Ovrhide]

Don’t care for drama, so Moving along.

 

[Spinoirr]

Yeah anyways we got the vol 7 commentary

 

[Spinoirr]

We can finally do RWBY crt

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

What's planned for far for the RWBY CRT?

From just my recollection, we're going to be re-doing scaling with Penny (and recalculating her beam attack from the earlier Volumes), re-tiering early volume characters (I've been told that Volume 1-3 characters were recalced to be High 8-C based on the Nevermore feat), and applying feats and scaling for Volume 7 that haven't been done yet?

I'll be going through Volume 7 some time this week to try and help with that. If anyone's actively working on the CRT, I also wouldn't mind discussing propositions here before we throw the thread onto the Content Revision Forum.

 

[Spinoirr]

Yeah let's talk here before a crf

 

[WeeklyBattles]

@Dargoo_Faust And reapplying MHS speed for people who scale to/above Cinder's group

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

And reapplying MHS speed for people who scale to/above Cinder's group

Could I get a refresher on why this was removed in the first place? Or just a link to that thread?

And by Cinder's group I'm taking it you mean Vol 1-3 Mercury and Emerald?

 

[Spinoirr]

Also Yang and Weiss stoping right In time as lightning came down

And it isn't aim dodging because they didn't see Raven or who they thought was the spring maiden bring it down

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

Also Yang and Weiss stoping right In time as lightning came down

Actually from how the feat is portrayed it's a warning bolt, and they don't even flinch at it until it strikes the ground.

This is true even if you go through it frame-by-frame. If anything it's an anti-feat, they didn't / couldn't react to natural lightning.

 

[Spinoirr]

Oof. Either way the maidens sould be at least mhs+ thanks to summoning lightning or makeing lightning